Dear Mr Chugtani, I am the Moderator of this group. Unlike other RTI groups, here we call a spade "a bloody shovel" ;-) Most members here are fed up with people who thrust their (newly discovered) ignorance of RTI Act in our face.
But first, Can you please explain why you defaulted on Rs.19 Lakh payment to the "Great Bank"? It is with considerable moderation that I am temporarily ignoring the advice of our senior members to boot you off India's most exclusive RTI group. Sarbajit --- In [email protected], "I K Chhugani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Deceitful order from Chief Info Commissioner, Maharashtra > > > > A. The officers of EOW wing of the Mumbai Police were in touch with > a fraudster on mobile No 9820060781, who had fled from India after > committing a fraud of Rs 1000 croresÂ… Read about Banks giving crores > http://www.roguepolice.com/pnb.htm <http://www.roguepolice.com/pnb.htm> > > > B. The police was trying to weaken the case against absconding > fraudster and FIR was filed against only 2 Directors, while over 20 > directors were involved in the 25 bogus companies floated by the > fraudster. > > > C. The petitioner was framed in a false case, by the police, after > purchasing a flat from the banks, which originally belonged to the > absconding fraudster. The petitioner filed CrWP 2414 /2005, praying for > action against police officers. It is kept for final hearing. > > > D. The Petitioner brought these facts to the notice of the Director > General of Police, Maharashtra, in 2005 . On receiving a written > complaint on 4th May 2005. DGP forwarded it to the Mumbai Commissioner > of police, for inquiry. This complaint is part of CrWP 2414/2005. > > > E. The inquiry was conducted, by the Addl. C.P. (EOW) Mr > G.L.Bishnoi, the very same department of the police, against which the > complaint was filed. The EOW refused to give the inquiry report > initially under RTI and has later, after 1st RTI appeal was filed, the > appellate authority passed order "Inquiry report will have to be > given". Given thereafter was a bogus unconnected document, calling > it the inquiry report. > > > F. The 2nd appeal under RTI act was filed in November 2006. It came > up for hearing with the Information Commissioner on 8th April 2008, 17 > months after it was filed. It was heard again on 10th April 2008. > Thereafter the petitioner was assured of an order in one week. > > > G. No order has been issued till date and the Office of the > Information Commissioner has no idea, when the order will be issued. > > > H. The outcome of this order, will have a direct effect on Cr WP > 2414 / 05 filed by the petitioner in this honourable court, and is kept > for final hearing. > > > I. The petitioner seeks directions, from this Honourable court to > the The Information Commissioner, to immediately pass the order, pending > for so long. > > _________________________________________________ > > > This Cr WP/1246 filed by me, came up before the Bombay High Court on > 7/7/2008. Court ordered Information Commissioner to pass order within 4 > weeks. > > On 4/8/2008, order of Information Commissioner (dt 14th May 2008) was > received by post. The order says "Heard both the parties and I > uphold the order of the 1st Appellate authority". > > Now while, hearing the case on 10th April 2008, information > Commissioner, was asking the 6 Sr IPS officers present fairly > intelligent questions, like "Show me once in the whole report, where > it is written "complaint dt 4th May 2005" or "Mobile No > 9820060781"" . Nowhere in the report these words appeared even > once, clearly proving it was a bogus report. > > The Info commissioner is trying to protect the Sr Police officials, Some > Judges and Politicians, who were regularly in touch with absconding > fraudster. > > Will appeal to the Governor of removal of the Information Commissioner > under Section 17 (3) d > > This section states "The Governor may order removal from the office of > the State Information Commissioner, if he (Governor) is of the opinion, > that he is unfit to continue in office by reason of infirmity of mind or > body." > > It is clear, while hearing the appeal on 10/4/2008, his mind was working > normally, while passing order his mind was unsound. > I K Chhugani > http://www.RoguePolice.com <http://www.roguepolice.com/> > Mobile 091 98201 71571 > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
